예일 대학과 콜럼비아 대학의 연구자들이 지난 2002년에 이어 두 번째로 각국 정부의 환경정책을 평가한 순위를 발표했다는 뉴욕타임즈지 기사입니다. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/24/science/24enviro.html

(뉴욕타임즈지 링크 기사를 보시려면 무료이긴 하지만 회원등록이 필요합니다. 어떻게든 원래 랭킹이 나온 사이트를 찾아 보려고 구글링을 하여 보았는데도 실패하여 할 수 없이 뉴욕 타임즈지 기사 원문을 퍼서 올립니다. 혹시 찾아 주시는 분 있으면 원래 랭킹 나온 사이트를 링크 걸도록 하겠습니다.)

핀란드, 노르웨이, 우루과이가 Top 3에 들었고, 미국은 146개국 중 45위군요. 제가 제목으로도 달았습니다만, 한국도 기사에서 상당히 비중있게 다루어졌군요. :-(

국가 크기나 인구밀도가 관련이 있기 때문에 예컨대 러시아가 33위를 한 것은 넓은 타이가 지역의 덕을 본 것도 있다고 하네요. 그렇게 치더라도 한국은 인구밀도가 1제곱킬로미터 당 100명 이상인 21개국 중에서도 14위에 그쳤군요.


Nations Ranked as Protectors of the Environment
By FELICITY BARRINGER

Published: January 24, 2005


ASHINGTON, Jan. 23 - Countries from Northern and Central Europe and South America dominated the top spots in the 2005 index of environmental sustainability, which ranks nations on their success at such tasks as maintaining or improving air and water quality, maximizing biodiversity and cooperating with other countries on environmental problems.

Advertisement


Finland, Norway and Uruguay held the top three spots in the ranking, prepared by researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities. The United States ranked 45th of the 146 countries studied, behind such countries as Japan, Botswana and the tiny Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, and most of Western Europe.

The lowest-ranking country was North Korea. Among those near the bottom were Haiti, Taiwan, Iraq and Kuwait.

The index is the second produced in collaboration with the World Economic Forum, which meets in Davos, Switzerland, this week. The first complete index, in 2002, produced outrage and soul-searching in lower-ranking countries like Belgium and South Korea, said Daniel C. Esty, the director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy and an author of the report.

The report is based on 75 measures, including the rate at which children die from respiratory diseases, fertility rates, water quality, overfishing, emission of heat-trapping gases and the export of sodium dioxide, a crucial component of acid rain.

In its opening chapter, the Environmental Sustainability Index report said: "Although imperfect, the E.S.I. helps to fill a long-existing gap in environmental performance evaluation. It offers a small step toward a more vigorous and quantitative approach to environmental decision making."

The report also cited a statistically significant correlation between high-ranking countries and countries with open political systems and effective governments.

The report's flaws stem largely from inadequate data, Mr. Esty said, adding that the ranking system is at best approximate, because some individual scores had to be imputed in many cases. But he said that data might improve in coming years.

He also said a system that rated Russia, whose populated western regions have undergone extraordinary environmental degradation, as having greater environmental sustainability than the United States had inherent weaknesses.

At 33, Russia's ranking, Mr. Esty said, is in large part a consequence of the country's vast size. While it "has terrible pollution problems" in the western industrial heartland, he said, its millions of unsettled or sparsely settled acres of Asian taiga mean "it has vast, untrammeled resources and more clean water than anywhere in the world." So, he added, "on average, Russia ends up looking better than it does to someone who lives in western Russia."

Because such differences make many countries inherently difficult to compare, he said, this report also analyzed seven clusters of similar countries; in this analysis, the United States ranked slightly below the halfway point among 24 members of the Organization of American States.

Another cluster ranked countries whose land is more than 50 percent desert, including Israel and much of the Arab world. In this group, Israel ranked second, after Namibia, and the best-performing Arab countries were Oman and Jordan. But some nations with considerable oil wealth, like Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, ranked in the bottom third.

After Finland, Norway and Uruguay, the top 10 countries in the overall rankings were, in order, Sweden, Iceland, Canada, Switzerland, Guyana, Argentina and Austria.

Irritation at low rankings in the 2002 index spurred countries like Mexico and South Korea to improve their efforts, Mr. Esty added. Young Keun Chung, an environmental economist with South Korea's state Korea Environment Institute, agreed, saying: "The first time we were shocked. Our government wanted to improve our situation. So we concentrated on improving environmental policy, pollution problems, traffic problems and everything."

South Korea moved up 13 spots between 2002 and the new report, but was only No. 122 in the overall index, and 14th out of 21 high-density countries in which more than half the land has a population density greater than 100 people per square kilometer.